The U.S. Govt. Can Now Legally Access Digital Data Stored Overseas

Democracy and liberalism leftists worldwide, if any of you still doubt the United States of America have effectively turned into a highly militarized police state, have a taste of democracy that applies to you directly. In the U.S., there exists the fourth amendment, which states:

'Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'

However, president Obama and his administration have clearly expressed their determination to control the information sphere globally, issuing a ruling that your digital property stored on servers overseas (in relation to the U.S. that is) is theirs to search and use against you.

A New York judge ruled that US-issued search warrants applied to all digital content stored on servers located worldwide. Initially, the US government sought access to one of the Microsoft's users accounts that was located in Dublin, Ireland. Microsoft challenged the ruling referring to the IV amendment, and suggesting that the U.S. government's stance creates a dangerous precedent that can conflict with the legal regulations of digital content of other countries. Microsoft argued that the government's understanding of its jurisdiction that extends to digital content stored on foreign servers is erroneous, but the US government responded referring to the Stored Communications Act, according to which any online-stored content is not protected by the Fourth Amendment:

'Overseas records must be disclosed domestically when a valid subpoena, order, or warrant compels their production. The disclosure of records under such circumstances has never been considered tantamount to a physical search under Fourth Amendment principles, and Microsoft is mistaken to argue that the SCA provides for an overseas search here. As there is no overseas search or seizure, Microsoft's reliance on principles of extra-territoriality and comity falls wide of the mark.'

The consequences of the ruling can be drastic on an international scale. We have heard too much about the U.S. government abusing its surveillance capabilities to spy on criminals and law-abiding citizens alike, and it won't take long before we hear they abuse the Stored Communications Act to access content stored online when dealing with its political and existential opposition.

Microsoft is not the only company that underlines the large-scale implications of the precedent. Verizon, Apple and Cisco also joined in, releasing a statement this case creates 'dramatic conflict with foreign data protection laws.'

The Irish Supreme Court, in the meantime, suggested a 'Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty' to allow the U.S. government access the Ireland-stored online content without difficulties. This news seems more important in the light of the recent law passed by the House of Representatives and the U.S. Congress Senate. According to the law, Washington reserves the right to invade the Netherlands if American citizens should be brought before the ICC, the International Criminal Court in Hague that prosecutes international war criminals.

It seems even more logical for China to work hard on development of its own operating systems to replace the Western Android and Windows products. Alas, the future prospects of the digital content stored online seem vague and uninspiring, as much as those of the world peace and global democracy.

Sources: Inside Counsel, Linustechtips, Engadget, ArsTechnica, the Stored Communications Act (PDF).